Is it really all about sex?

Is it all really about sex


  • Total voters
    39
But surely drugs & rock'n roll is equally important to sex!
 
I don't know so much.

Picture yourself on the brink of starvation. Now imagine a boutilicious babe sitting on your right and a big plate of your favourite food on your left.

Which way do you turn?
 
Hunger, thirst, rage, pain, fear, and stupidity aren't "a driving primal instinctual part of us"?
 
Self-preservation is, though. And I think it's got the lead on species-preservation. Usually.
 
I don't know so much.

Picture yourself on the brink of starvation. Now imagine a boutilicious babe sitting on your right and a big plate of your favourite food on your left.

Which way do you turn?

Hunger, thirst, rage, pain, fear, and stupidity aren't "a driving primal instinctual part of us"?

Self-preservation is, though. And I think it's got the lead on species-preservation. Usually.

I'm not saying those aren't also parts of it as well - of course they are. But Borachio, the real gist of it is why do we have a need to self-preserve? So we can continue to procreate that's why. At its most basic level, life is about procreation, i.e. sex. Without it, none of us would be here.
 
You mused that it's hard to think of something stronger. Sex is subservient to those. It doesn't mean the urge to rut not powerful or procreation is not impactful, but dead men fornicate no women and raise no sons. Chicken, egg, scrambled eggs, all delicious.
 
You mused that it's hard to think of something stronger. Sex is subservient to those. It doesn't mean the urge to rut not powerful or procreation is not impactful, but dead men fornicate no women and raise no sons. Chicken, egg, scrambled eggs, all delicious.

Exactly, but what drives the desire to live in us? That's the question I'm asking.

Btw, if the urge to self-preserve is so strong, why are many willing to sacrifice themselves to save their lovers? ;)
 
Sacrifice to save. You get to do it once. But not if you're already dead.

-What drives the desire to to live in us? I'd say: Thirst. Hunger. Pain. Fear. Love. You combine them and more all together and you wind up with this mushy smushy term, "will to live."
 
Sacrifice to save. You get to do it once. But not if you're already dead.

-What drives the desire to to live in us? I'd say: Thirst. Hunger. Pain. Fear. Love. You combine them and more all together and you wind up with this mushy smushy term, "will to live."

I don't disagree, but just consider 'sex' to be an integral part of that 'will to live' thingy. But for the sake of expedience, i'll give in that the 'will to live' is more overriding that the power of sex, and that both of those more powerful than a locomotive. :lol:
 
I dunno. Eating to prevent starvation is one thing but I think the pursuit of power, wealth, fame, glory and all the rest is driven more by sex than the desire to not starve. That's what I think of when I think of the "it" in this type of question. I.e. not just the survival of our organism, but the pursuit of more.
 
I meant more like a class a semester, or some certified activity. but given the cost of university these days it does seem mostly unconscionable to force somebody broke and living on decades-long-payoff loans to pay like 2 to 4 grand a year to use a basketball court.
What would be the point of forcing students who are already overworked with classes, homework, and a part-time job to spend more money and time on some activity that in most cases would have nothing whatsoever to do with their field of study? And what about the disabled students or those who for other reasons can't do PE?

The way my college dealt with this was to charge every student "athletic fees" which meant that we could use the gym if we wanted to, but we didn't have to unless it was for a course requirement. The only use I ever got out of the fees I had to pay was during final exams, when the larger classes had to write their exams in the gym because the regular room wasn't big enough for all of us.

Yes. No. I mean I know there are people who self-identify as asexual. I just doubt that they really are. It's not just a matter of not having sex, imo - we've all done that at some point in our lives, and it doesn't make us asexual. Nor is it even just a matter of not wanting to have sex, since we've all (hopefully) also met people who we simply wouldn't want to do it with.

Of course, a great deal depends on how you define sexuality. And my own vague definition is broad enough for me to sincerely doubt that asexuality really exists.
You have just basically called some of your fellow forum members liars. Doesn't it make sense that they would know more than you about what they think and feel about themselves?

All of which pale in comparison with the power of sex. The need to procreate is a driving primal instinctual part of us that has been around since, well, forever.
I never had a "need to procreate." The species will do fine without my "contribution." Better, in fact, for reasons I've discussed elsewhere.
 
What would be the point of forcing students who are already overworked with classes, homework, and a part-time job to spend more money and time on some activity that in most cases would have nothing whatsoever to do with their field of study? And what about the disabled students or those who for other reasons can't do PE?

The more they study it the less tenuous the link between decent physical health and mental health becomes. If it's part of the required curriculum I'd be suggesting that room be made in the curriculum rather than piling on an additional requirement. It'd come from the general education requirements. Obviously, disabled students don't have to take basketball or soccer or whatever. There are many physical activities that are compatible with various disabilities and there are program waivers/substitutions for disabilities that are incompatible. Universities are full of smart people, they're good at that sort of thing.
 
Then why was I most depressed when physically active and working?
 
I never had a "need to procreate." The species will do fine without my "contribution." Better, in fact, for reasons I've discussed elsewhere.

I'm making the assumption we are discussing the species as a whole, not individuals and their specific issues. There are always exceptions to every rule. Considering how upset you got last time you brought up your personal beliefs along these lines, I'm not sure why you'd bring them up again.
 
Then why was I most depressed when physically active and working?

I really don't know. Is it because you're a uniquely special person?

The depressed person typically stays in bed for long periods of time, doing nothing.
 
I'm making the assumption we are discussing the species as a whole, not individuals and their specific issues. There are always exceptions to every rule. Considering how upset you got last time you brought up your personal beliefs along these lines, I'm not sure why you'd bring them up again.
I got upset because you kept insisting that my position on the issue was not a valid one.

The issue itself is not something I'm ever going to allow anyone to judge me on, or try to make me feel ashamed or guilty.

The depressed person typically stays in bed for long periods of time, doing nothing.
Some depressed people do this, yes. But others do manage to get up and go through the motions of keeping themselves alive, although there may not be much joy in it.

Thank goodness for my cats. Some people think my life would be better without them, since they cost money to feed and care for, extra fees to include them in my lease, I've had to "cat-proof" some things in the apartment, and I can't just decide to take off for a holiday without arranging for a cat sitter (no reliable cat boarding facilities in town). But there have been days that if it hadn't been for them, I really wouldn't see much point in getting out of bed.
 
why do we have a need to self-preserve? So we can continue to procreate that's why.
The existence of menopause would seem to indicate your answer is incomplete. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom